Just a missing period? (The Carey OCT, 2013 printing.) The typo wouldn’t normally through me for a loop, but the next sentence seems to be missing an object (αὐτόν=Andocides, per apparatus suggestions, but I would have assumed more likely all the people exiled over the herm mutilation in general?) for ἐξείργειν.
In fact the speech seems pretty rough just around here. That’s not even to complain about the two missing pages just before this from the manuscript of Lysias that all the rest seem to have been copied from, that somehow fell out right at the most interesting bit (end of the Kallias and beginning of the Andocides speeches).
Just a period is missing. The next sentence doesn’t refer specifically to Andocides or the profanation of the Elysinian Mysteries. It’s a general statement about the practices of Greeks outside Athens with regard to exclusions from sacred rites. They go so far as to exclude/impose exclusion in their own cities on account of impieties committed right here in Athens. But the Athenians, in contrast, treat impieties committed right at home less seriously than Greeks elsewhere treat impieties committed in Athens. That’s the gist. αὐτὸν is an erroneous intrusion rightly rejected.
Yeah, that’s what I worked out, with the exception that the τὰ ἐνθάδε ἀσεβήματα strikes me as specific here rather than general, given the the context and the claim made. But either way, the next sentence would have been far more straightforward with an explicit object, though not αὐτόν. You can see why it’s been considered more than once. I can’t imagine the sentence being understood in court as-is.